What Percent is Your Tesla Charged to While at Home?

[AAKEE]

View attachment 953710
Alright gang, I need some help here - I supercharged a few times month ago on a 1000kms road trip but it’s now showing I’ve lost over 10% capacity!

Haven’t charged passed 55% other than the supercharging to about 70-85%.

I’ve read this could be a BMS calibration issue so last night I charged from 6% -> 100% via Level 2 charger and this screenshot is after that charge, no recovery
Do I need to do it again or did 3 supercharging sessions toast my 82kwh battery (seems unlikely).

Relax!

For starters, for once Tessie seems spot on tyhe initial capacity. (I guess per definition it acutally starts around 82kWh moslty, but is at 80.5 or so when the user get the car.)

Ususal capacity 75.3kWh doesnt seem that bad.
The line on the other hand points a bit lower.

Supercharging seem to decrease the capacity on short term, but using low SOC when not needing more seem to recover capacity. This is supported by research on the subject.

Just go 50-55% when you do not need more than that and give it a month or so, the capacity and range will most probably increase again.
Small cycles at low SOC seem to deplete som of the lithium plating caused by fast charging.

In any case, having high SOC ( > 55%) in a high temperature environment will take a bigger bite of the battery than occational supercharging.

 

[m3p-ev]

thanks @AAKEE !

I did want to test out the full HP pulls with 100% and it was awesome but will continue with the 55% regimen.

On the m3p, I don’t see much HP loss 0-100kmh at 55% but the higher end is insanely better (100kmh+) - not relevant for regular commuting but definitely for track!

HP loss at low speeds is very obvious once it hits 20% and the battery goes orange!

 

[AAKEE]

thanks @AAKEE !

I did want to test out the full HP pulls with 100% and it was awesome but will continue with the 55% regimen.

On the m3p, I don’t see much HP loss 0-100kmh at 55% but the higher end is insanely better (100kmh+) - not relevant for regular commuting but definitely for track!

HP loss at low speeds is very obvious once it hits 20% and the battery goes orange!

If you supercharge to 90% or more and preheat it before, the pulls from 0-100km/will be best.
I have a dragy box (and a old Vericom dragracing computer), and we need high SOC and a warm battery to make the bests pulls.
I have a 3.21s 0-100km/h, I think. Was not possible without a warm batt with high SOC.

I used high SOC at special occations, when high power was wanted. Other days, 55% but as I charged shortly before with maximum AC power the drive the batt was warm = quite good power anyway.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Ususal capacity 75.3kWh doesnt seem that bad.

It’s probably just fine. Still, seems quite bad to me - kind of high for nearly new vehicle (picked up early May AFAIK, so two months) in Toronto. Though I guess it has been warm there (?), I would not think two months of ownership at moderately warm temps and basically zero use would result in this (and probably this is well outside your model predictions?) 6.6% loss.

It took my car about 18 months to get to that point, with poor charging habits (80-90%), in temperate climate of San Diego (not super hot all the time, sometimes hot, never very cold).

Probably just bouncing around, or too low an estimate. Or it started at lower than typical 80.6kWh for a Model 3 Performance. (And maybe is still trying to figure things out.)

Curious whether it will come back in line.

@m3p-ev, what does the car say the capacity is? I think Tessie’s estimates seem to be generally ok for what they represent, but maybe it got a bad data point somehow? I certainly trust the car’s value for capacity over any app’s representation of the capacity. (Though there is usually no significant discrepancy.)

 

[AAKEE]

It’s probably just fine. Still, seems quite bad to me - kind of high for nearly new vehicle (picked up early May AFAIK, so two months) in Toronto. Though I guess it has been warm there (?), I would not think two months of ownership at moderately warm temps and basically zero use would result in this (and probably this is well outside your model predictions?) 6.6% loss.

It took my car about 18 months to get to that point, with poor charging habits (80-90%), in temperate climate of San Diego (not super hot all the time, sometimes hot, never very cold).

Probably just bouncing around, or too low an estimate. Or it started at lower than typical 80.6kWh for a Model 3 Performance. (And maybe is still trying to figure things out.)

Curious whether it will come back in line.

@m3p-ev, what does the car say the capacity is? I think Tessie’s estimates seem to be generally ok for what they represent, but maybe it got a bad data point somehow? I certainly trust the car’s value for capacity over any app’s representation of the capacity. (Though there is usually no significant discrepancy.)

We need to check if the car is China
made, with the LG M-50 starting at 78.8.

 

[804son]

My own experience with the cars starting kWh, shows that cars are not always at this standard 82kWh expected capacity.
I have been using Teslafi now Tessie, since my 2022 M3LRAWD was delivered and the highest I ever show the capacity was 79.48 kWh @ 5,527 miles.

 

[AAKEE]

My own experience with the cars starting kWh, shows that cars are not always at this standard 82kWh expected capacity.
I have been using Teslafi now Tessie, since my 2022 M3LRAWD was delivered and the highest I ever show the capacity was 79.48 kWh @ 5,527 miles.

Teslafi do not show capacity but they show range (I did use on my M3P and now on my MSP).

Range is capped on the same way as the energy graph.

For Tessie and the way they calculate it (added kWh, that is only a conversion from added km, or the difference in range, I guess they are capped too).

My M3P had 80.7 Nominal full pack at first check after delivery.
Topped out 81.6kWh with 82.0 kWh remaining.

Data below is from the BMS so no flawed calculations from any app

 

[804son]

Teslafi do not show capacity but they show range (I did use on my M3P and now on my MSP).

Range is capped on the same way as the energy graph.

For Tessie and the way they calculate it (added kWh, that is only a conversion from added km, or the difference in range, I guess they are capped too).

My M3P had 80.7 Nominal full pack at first check after delivery.
Topped out 81.6kWh with 82.0 kWh remaining.

Data below is from the BMS so no flawed calculations from any app
View attachment 954057

Teslafi, doesn't show the kWh, but once you export the data to Tessie, you will see the kWh for all the exported data.
The SMT "Full Pack when new" number is a plug number. So I can't trust it's accuracy.

Yours may have been 82kWh, but I don't believe they are all coming that way.

 

[AAKEE]

thanks @AAKEE !

Would you supply us with the tre first letters/numbers of t
Your cars VIN?

Does it start with LRW?

 

[AAKEE]

Teslafi, doesn't show the kWh, but once you export the data to Tessie, you will see the kWh for all the exported data.
The SMT "Full Pack when new" number is a plug number. So I can't trust it's accuracy.

Yours may have been 82kWh, but I don't believe they are all coming that way.

Most have started around 80.5kWh (plus minus 0.5kWh or so).

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

The SMT "Full Pack when new" number is a plug number. So I can't trust it's accuracy.

Definitely, FPWN is hard coded. But the Nominal Full Pack in that capture is 81.6kWh, which is from the BMS.

Plenty of examples of Performance with “82.1kWh” pack showing over 80.6kWh. In fact, if they are less than about 80.4-80.5kWh, they won’t show 315 rated miles at 100%. And most new Performance seem to have shown that.

 

[AAKEE]

Definitely, FPWN is hard coded. But the Nominal Full Pack in that capture is 81.6kWh, which is from the BMS.

Plenty of examples of Performance with “82.1kWh” pack showing over 80.6kWh. In fact, if they are less than about 80.4-80.5kWh, they won’t show 315 rated miles at 100%. And most new Performance seem to have shown that.

And nomimal remaining 82.0, not far from FPWN.
I always got a higher nomimal remaining when charging full than the nominal full pack number, 0.3-0.5kWh was the normal delta

 

[804son]

Definitely, FPWN is hard coded. But the Nominal Full Pack in that capture is 81.6kWh, which is from the BMS.

Plenty of examples of Performance with “82.1kWh” pack showing over 80.6kWh. In fact, if they are less than about 80.4-80.5kWh, they won’t show 315 rated miles at 100%. And most new Performance seem to have shown that.

Agreed, if the Nominal full pack is showing it that is trustworthy information. just not the FPWN. Just didn't want people to get the impression that the newer Model 3's are all showing up with 82.1 kWh when new, If they base their degradation numbers on that they're going to show some skewed results. The delta between the 82.1 & 80.5 is a degradation of almost 2%.

 

[AAKEE]

Agreed, if the Nominal full pack is showing it that is trustworthy information. just not the FPWN. Just didn't want people to get the impression that the newer Model 3's are all showing up with 82.1 kWh when new, If they base their degradation numbers on that they're going to show some skewed results. The delta between the 82.1 & 80.5 is a degradation of almost 2%.

Yes, I think we are on speaking terms

I think though, that Tessie due to how they calculate the capacity, will miss any capacity above the range cap, as they use added energy for their capacity calculation.

We have been discussing that mather lately, Tessie use the added energy which includes the buffer and thereby exaggerating the charged energy by 1/0.955. (In short Tessies ”usable capacity” actually is total capacity including the buffer).

Most probably, using the added energy value as it is directly coupled to the increased range from the charging session, this calculation will be capped by the max displayed range which in turn will set the max calculated capacity to the capped range/capacity on the display/energy screen.

Taking Teslafi numbers and converting these to energy also will end up with the capped energy.

For example, teslafi showed about 507 km for a long time for me, even when the nominal full pack was 81.4-81.6 which I had for a quite long time.
507 km equals about (507km x 159Wh/km) = 80.6kWh.
Most probably, tessie wont show a higher number, and the teslafi range will not be converted to a higher number I guess.

I have seen enough Tessie screenshots that equals the 79.1 or so cap on M3LR but no screenshot above that number, pointing to a support of the capped energy max in Tessie.

 

[m3p-ev]

It’s probably just fine. Still, seems quite bad to me - kind of high for nearly new vehicle (picked up early May AFAIK, so two months) in Toronto. Though I guess it has been warm there (?), I would not think two months of ownership at moderately warm temps and basically zero use would result in this (and probably this is well outside your model predictions?) 6.6% loss.

It took my car about 18 months to get to that point, with poor charging habits (80-90%), in temperate climate of San Diego (not super hot all the time, sometimes hot, never very cold).

Probably just bouncing around, or too low an estimate. Or it started at lower than typical 80.6kWh for a Model 3 Performance. (And maybe is still trying to figure things out.)

Curious whether it will come back in line.

@m3p-ev, what does the car say the capacity is? I think Tessie’s estimates seem to be generally ok for what they represent, but maybe it got a bad data point somehow? I certainly trust the car’s value for capacity over any app’s representation of the capacity. (Though there is usually no significant discrepancy.)

Correct, picked up in May, driven 5000kms since and the weather has been pretty hot (cabin protection usually on) though the average SOC was 55% (only ever charged to 55% other than 3-4 super charger sessions on a road trip ranging from 70-85% SOC).

It seems extremely high for 2 months degradation so I am a bit concerned - my initial capacity was around 80.6kwh and went as high as 81.4kwh (according to Tessie, which from this thread seems like it’s calculating based on added power). I drove around 4000kms and can see from the dots in the original screenshot the capacity was always this high.

1000 kms later and 3 super charging sessions, I saw it dropped to 71.9kwh!! From highest to lowest that’s about a 11-12% loss.

The 75kwh usable in the screenshot is the average, current capacity is around 72.9kwh so it’s slowly creeping back up… hopefully…

(Numbers are from the individual dots/data points in Tessie battery usable capacity graph)

Would you supply us with the tre first letters/numbers of t
Your cars VIN?

Does it start with LRW?

It is a Fremont-made M3P, 82kwh pack.

VIN starting with 5WJ

 

[m3p-ev]

Teslafi do not show capacity but they show range (I did use on my M3P and now on my MSP).

Range is capped on the same way as the energy graph.

For Tessie and the way they calculate it (added kWh, that is only a conversion from added km, or the difference in range, I guess they are capped too).

My M3P had 80.7 Nominal full pack at first check after delivery.
Topped out 81.6kWh with 82.0 kWh remaining.

Data below is from the BMS so no flawed calculations from any app
View attachment 954057

How does one take readings from the BMS directly?

 

[m3p-ev]

@m3p-ev, what does the car say the capacity is? I think Tessie’s estimates seem to be generally ok for what they represent, but maybe it got a bad data point somehow? I certainly trust the car’s value for capacity over any app’s representation of the capacity. (Though there is usually no significant discrepancy.)

I Level 2 charged it to 100% a few days ago to see what the full range was and to try to reset BMS but it was definitely less than the rated 507kms/315 miles (6% remaining+459kms based on this Tessie screenshot). Also weirdly it stopped charging at 99% but then showed 100 once I got in the car (public charger so maybe the calibration never happened..?)

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I Level 2 charged it to 100% a few days ago to see what the full range was and to try to reset BMS but it was definitely less than the rated 507kms/315 miles (6% remaining+459kms based on this Tessie screenshot). Also weirdly it stopped charging at 99% but then showed 100 once I got in the car (public charger so maybe the calibration never happened..?)

What I mean is what does the car say? I can’t infer from the Tessie screenshot what the situation is, since I don’t know how it aligns to the car’s display of energy remaining.

In other words at 99% or 100% how many rated miles (or better yet, use the energy screen method)?

 

[AAKEE]

the average SOC was 55% (only ever charged to 55% other than 3-4 super charger sessions on a road trip ranging from 70-85% SOC).

With this charging habit you should have low degradation.
Degradation from calendar and cyclic aging is predictable so the real degradation will follow the known data unless there is a issue of some kind with the battery, which is not very probable. If it was you would probably end up with new battery.

It is possible that the charging habit (low SOC) could offset the BMS to show too low capacity. I would guess this is the case, but I havent seen any other BMS be so much off though.
My BMS was about 3.3kWh (4%) off last summer. The BMS sorted that out by itself after a couple of months.

I looked up the climate in Toronto, and from delivery until now your batt should be at about 1% loss, not more. So you should still have at least 80kWh capacity.

Perhaps performing a BMS calibration could help increasing the calculated capacity.
It would be best to know the range the car itself shows instead of Tessie calculation. Even if the ”usable capacity” often is in line with nominal full pack we better reduce all error sources. Whats the range displayed in the car at the battery symbol at full charge?

It seems extremely high for 2 months degradation so I am a bit concerned - my initial capacity was around 80.6kwh and went as high as 81.4kwh (according to Tessie, which from this thread seems like it’s calculating based on added power).

The initial numbers look good and 81.4 kWh also.
(I note that Tessie seem to be able to calculate the capacity above the degradation threshold/ range cap wgich is good news!)

It is a Fremont-made M3P, 82kwh pack.

VIN starting with 5WJ

Ok.

 

[AAKEE]

(6% remaining+459kms based on this Tessie screenshot). Also weirdly it stopped charging at 99% but then showed 100 once I got in the car (public charger so maybe the calibration never happened..?)

If we play with the thought that the car has 80kWh capacity, 6% is about 4.6kWh. The buffer is 3.6 kWh.
So with 6%, you started with 8.2kWh omboard.

459 km added on the cars screen is about 459x159x0.955 = 69.7 kWh added to the nominal remaining.
8.2+69.7 = 77.9kWh capacity.

The tessie numbers do not seem to match the cars own, unless ”added” range is another range than the cars displayed range.

In the service menu, what wheels do you have selected? 20” Überturbine?
(Not asking what wheels you actually have but the selected wheels in the service menu ) My M3P did loose displayed with all other wheels than the 20” Übers. It even showed lower SOC!!!

I’m with @AlanSubie4Life on this, we should start to only refer to the displayed values on the screen, like displayed range and energy screen calulations. And for now disregard Tessie values.
Once we have gotten a grip over the situation, we can compare the Tessie values with the known data.